Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    I got an offer in the mail offering me 8pm N/W minutes if I sign
    another 1 year agreement and change my terms and conditions of
    service. Nowhere on the Sprint site could I find my current terms and
    conditions and I am uneasy to change without reading 'the fine print'.
    For example, I am not currently paying the 'cost recovery charges'
    (whatever they are) and am thinking that if I change my Ts & Cs of my
    plan I will have to pay this fee. Does anyone out there know what I"m
    asking??? Any input would be appreciated.



    See More: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???




  2. #2
    Phillipe
    Guest

    Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???

    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] wrote:

    > I got an offer in the mail offering me 8pm N/W minutes if I sign
    > another 1 year agreement and change my terms and conditions of
    > service. Nowhere on the Sprint site could I find my current terms and
    > conditions and I am uneasy to change without reading 'the fine print'.
    > For example, I am not currently paying the 'cost recovery charges'
    > (whatever they are)


    More than likely you are it is called:
    Federal Wireless Number Pooling And Portability
    and will be on Page 2 of your last Invoice

    > and am thinking that if I change my Ts & Cs of my
    > plan I will have to pay this fee. Does anyone out there know what I"m
    > asking??? Any input would be appreciated.


    What your plan contains may be found by logging into
    http://www.sprintpcs.com

    If you otherwise like Sprint, having your Nights and Weekends start at 8
    PM is certainly better than a kick in the teeth. Some folks have
    reported getting even more perks by negociating at a Sprint owned store.



  3. #3
    Chris Russell
    Guest

    Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???

    http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/in...rmsPrivacy.jsp

    Go to item 9 about half way down the page- T & C of Services-read them
    and then decide if you want to sign on for another year and get N&W 8pm
    start.

    --
    Chris

    Please respond on Usenet or Phonescoop.com


    [email protected] wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    > I got an offer in the mail offering me 8pm N/W minutes if I sign
    > another 1 year agreement and change my terms and conditions of
    > service. Nowhere on the Sprint site could I find my current terms and
    > conditions and I am uneasy to change without reading 'the fine print'.
    > For example, I am not currently paying the 'cost recovery charges'
    > (whatever they are) and am thinking that if I change my Ts & Cs of my
    > plan I will have to pay this fee. Does anyone out there know what I"m
    > asking??? Any input would be appreciated.


    [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]



  4. #4
    John
    Guest

    Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???

    Wow. I just took a look at the T&C's, and it's pretty sloppy. Case in
    point. In every T&C's I've read, it always says something to the effect of
    continued use of service means you accept the lastest version of the T&C's.
    All they have to do is make them readily accessable as an insert with your
    bill or on a web page and inaction by the consumer equals acceptance. So,
    that means the OP is already stuck with the latest T&C's.

    However, SPCS's T&C's have two contradictory clauses regarding changes to
    the T&C. On point 11. Change in Internet Site or in User Agreement, it
    says "Sprint PCS may modify this User Agreement at any time by posting the
    revised agreement on the Internet site. Any revised User Agreement is
    effective upon the user accessing this Internet site." Congratulations, so
    if I never go to their web site, I'm not bound by the new ones. No one else
    would do this.

    Then, towards the end of point 12, they have the more standard policies.
    "Modifications to terms of service, member policies. Sprint PCS reserves the
    right to change the Terms of Service or policies regarding the use of the
    Service at any time and to notify you by posting an updated version of the
    Terms of Service on this Web site. You are responsible for regularly
    reviewing the Terms of Service. Continued use of the Service after any such
    changes shall constitute your consent to such changes."

    This one would normally be fine, except they did the indentations wrong, so
    it looks like it only applies to point 12, which concerns Wireless Web Mail.
    Oops.

    Now, this isn't a Get out of Jail Free pass for everyone. Its quite clearly
    a mistake by a low-level paper pusher. But someone needs to tell SPCS to
    proof-read their T&C's.



    "Chris Russell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/in...rmsPrivacy.jsp
    >
    > Go to item 9 about half way down the page- T & C of Services-read them
    > and then decide if you want to sign on for another year and get N&W 8pm
    > start.
    >
    > --
    > Chris
    >
    > Please respond on Usenet or Phonescoop.com
    >
    >
    > [email protected] wrote in article
    > <[email protected]>:
    > > I got an offer in the mail offering me 8pm N/W minutes if I sign
    > > another 1 year agreement and change my terms and conditions of
    > > service. Nowhere on the Sprint site could I find my current terms and
    > > conditions and I am uneasy to change without reading 'the fine print'.
    > > For example, I am not currently paying the 'cost recovery charges'
    > > (whatever they are) and am thinking that if I change my Ts & Cs of my
    > > plan I will have to pay this fee. Does anyone out there know what I"m
    > > asking??? Any input would be appreciated.

    >
    > [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]






  5. #5
    p lane
    Guest

    Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???

    Did you happpen to catch some postings somewhere about aug 13 by Nomen
    Nescio which seemed a hopefully sensible discussion on a lot of the
    points you are bring up.

    "John" <[email protected]> wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    > Wow. I just took a look at the T&C's, and it's pretty sloppy. Case in
    > point. In every T&C's I've read, it always says something to the effect of
    > continued use of service means you accept the lastest version of the T&C's.
    > All they have to do is make them readily accessable as an insert with your
    > bill or on a web page and inaction by the consumer equals acceptance. So,
    > that means the OP is already stuck with the latest T&C's.
    >
    > However, SPCS's T&C's have two contradictory clauses regarding changes to
    > the T&C. On point 11. Change in Internet Site or in User Agreement, it
    > says "Sprint PCS may modify this User Agreement at any time by posting the
    > revised agreement on the Internet site. Any revised User Agreement is
    > effective upon the user accessing this Internet site." Congratulations, so
    > if I never go to their web site, I'm not bound by the new ones. No one else
    > would do this.
    >
    > Then, towards the end of point 12, they have the more standard policies.
    > "Modifications to terms of service, member policies. Sprint PCS reserves the
    > right to change the Terms of Service or policies regarding the use of the
    > Service at any time and to notify you by posting an updated version of the
    > Terms of Service on this Web site. You are responsible for regularly
    > reviewing the Terms of Service. Continued use of the Service after any such
    > changes shall constitute your consent to such changes."
    >
    > This one would normally be fine, except they did the indentations wrong, so
    > it looks like it only applies to point 12, which concerns Wireless Web Mail.
    > Oops.
    >
    > Now, this isn't a Get out of Jail Free pass for everyone. Its quite clearly
    > a mistake by a low-level paper pusher. But someone needs to tell SPCS to
    > proof-read their T&C's.
    >
    >
    >
    > "Chris Russell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/in...rmsPrivacy.jsp
    > >
    > > Go to item 9 about half way down the page- T & C of Services-read them
    > > and then decide if you want to sign on for another year and get N&W 8pm
    > > start.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Chris
    > >
    > > Please respond on Usenet or Phonescoop.com
    > >
    > >
    > > [email protected] wrote in article
    > > <[email protected]>:
    > > > I got an offer in the mail offering me 8pm N/W minutes if I sign
    > > > another 1 year agreement and change my terms and conditions of
    > > > service. Nowhere on the Sprint site could I find my current terms and
    > > > conditions and I am uneasy to change without reading 'the fine print'.
    > > > For example, I am not currently paying the 'cost recovery charges'
    > > > (whatever they are) and am thinking that if I change my Ts & Cs of my
    > > > plan I will have to pay this fee. Does anyone out there know what I"m
    > > > asking??? Any input would be appreciated.

    > >
    > > [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]

    >
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]



  6. #6
    John
    Guest

    Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???

    I couldn't find many posts by Nomen, but I did find one on the "End of
    unlimited Vision" thread. First off, I'd hesitate on trusting anything he
    says. Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> has posted some very strange stuff
    and has widely been called a troll/nutcase. See:

    http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q...&num=100&hl=en

    He is clearly not an attorney. He is not listed in Martindale-Hubbell,
    which lists just about every attorney in the US. Two years ago, he worked a
    Radio Shack. So, at best, he's a law student. See:

    http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...link.net#link1

    So, I'd say his understanding of consumer and contract law is limited, at
    best. Quite clearly, his "personal experience" is not something I'd bet the
    bank on.

    That being said, in his post (quoted below), he throws his opinions
    regarding "Federal Consumer Law" around as fact without any citations. I'm
    not an expert on consumer law, so I'll just leave it at I disagree with many
    of his assertions. It is definitely not as "basic" as he believes it to be.
    If it is, I invite him to cite the statute and court cases.

    Furthermore, certain phrases he used are marks of a non-attorney. There is
    no such thing as a "Federal Consumer Law." There are several statutes that,
    in totality, make up federal consumer law, but no single Law. It's also
    important to note that the majority of consumer law is state law, not
    federal law. Also, "consumer law judge"??? There's no such thing. It's
    not exactly as if judges are specialized. Considering that all these
    complaints are for small amounts, they'd end up before a small claims court
    judge who may or may not have a strong understanding of consumer law.

    Basically, I haven't found any worthwhile posts by Nomen. If you can
    provide a link to any, I'd be interested in seeing them.

    *********

    Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    > O/Sirius is just the messenger so I don't want to shoot him, but most

    Sprint employees have a
    > lack of understand of Consumer Law.
    >
    > If these people whom Sprint is targeting bought connection cables from a

    Sprint store, Sprint
    > has a potential problem. If anybody bought a Vision capable-phone, and/or

    a subscription to
    > Sprint based at least in part on the claims of Sprint salespeople who

    directly said they would
    > be able to use it with a laptop .. then Sprint has a potential problem.
    >
    > In any of the above two situations, the Consumer is entitled BY LAW to a

    full refund of the
    > purchase price of the accessory, the hardware, and is not required to

    continue a contract.
    >
    > Even though a restriction may be put somewhere in the lengthy T&C, this

    would still fall under
    > the definition of false advertising.
    >
    > According to Federal Consumer Law, the consumer is entitled to what is

    containted in the "Main
    > Advertising Language", or entitled to whatever is verbally promised to

    them by a salesperson
    > acting on behalf of a company.
    >
    > Fine print cannot negate a good-faith understanding. Fine print goes down

    in flames in about
    > 90% of consumer cases that I have been involved with.
    >
    > The entire issue is really very basic. You are entitled to what you were

    promised. Period.
    > That's all a consumer law judge will consider.
    >
    > So, if you were never promised vision with a laptop, knew it was wrong,

    and used it anyway ...
    > you can be shut off.
    >
    > If you were told you could use it be an agent of Sprint (a salesperson

    qualifies as an agent),
    > and indeed sold a device for a profit that enabled you to do this - Sprint

    must let you use it
    > or offer you a refund.
    >
    > Hopefully O/Sirius and his collegues can determine who is who in tracking

    down Vision users,
    > because they may end up owing refunds to alot of those customers they are

    tracking.
    >
    > It sounds like Sprint should be going after their salespeople instead of

    their customers if they
    > are unhappy with the way the service is being used.
    >
    > A sales tool cannot be considered abuse.
    >
    > At least not legally. It's doubtful that anyone will legally challenge

    it, but if they did,
    > Sprint would lose. I've seen it happen. I've personally worked on such

    cases. Much depends on
    > the individual judge, but from personal experience Sprint would stand

    about a 10% of prevailing
    > in court by simply waiving the T&C in the judges face. Especially if the

    defendant had a
    > receipt for a data cable from a Sprint store, and a witness to the

    conversation with the
    > salesperson.
    >
    > Sprint should tread lightly here with this "abuse" thing. It may very

    well be abuse, but the
    > perpetrators of the abuse may well be their own employees.






  7. #7
    John
    Guest

    Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???

    Okay, I just posted a message which I tried to cancel. Please disregard
    that one. I apparently need to learn more about anonymous remailers.

    As for the posts you're referring to, I was able to find one in the thread
    "End of unlimited Vision." Let's just say I disagree with it. Consumer law
    is not clear cut as he makes it out to be. Some of the phrases he uses are
    not the mark of an attorney. At the very least, he should recognize that
    the vast majority of consumer law is not from the "Federal Consumer Law",
    but from state laws. Also, he mentions "consumer law judges." There's no
    such thing. It's not exactly as if judges are specialized. Considering
    that all these
    complaints are for small amounts, they'd end up before a small claims court
    judge who may or may not have a strong understanding of consumer law.

    If you're referring to other posts, please post a link since I couldn't find
    any others. I'd be interested in seeing it.


    "p lane" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Did you happpen to catch some postings somewhere about aug 13 by Nomen
    > Nescio which seemed a hopefully sensible discussion on a lot of the
    > points you are bring up.
    >
    > "John" <[email protected]> wrote in article
    > <[email protected]>:
    > > Wow. I just took a look at the T&C's, and it's pretty sloppy. Case in
    > > point. In every T&C's I've read, it always says something to the effect

    of
    > > continued use of service means you accept the lastest version of the

    T&C's.
    > > All they have to do is make them readily accessable as an insert with

    your
    > > bill or on a web page and inaction by the consumer equals acceptance.

    So,
    > > that means the OP is already stuck with the latest T&C's.
    > >
    > > However, SPCS's T&C's have two contradictory clauses regarding changes

    to
    > > the T&C. On point 11. Change in Internet Site or in User Agreement, it
    > > says "Sprint PCS may modify this User Agreement at any time by posting

    the
    > > revised agreement on the Internet site. Any revised User Agreement is
    > > effective upon the user accessing this Internet site." Congratulations,

    so
    > > if I never go to their web site, I'm not bound by the new ones. No one

    else
    > > would do this.
    > >
    > > Then, towards the end of point 12, they have the more standard policies.
    > > "Modifications to terms of service, member policies. Sprint PCS reserves

    the
    > > right to change the Terms of Service or policies regarding the use of

    the
    > > Service at any time and to notify you by posting an updated version of

    the
    > > Terms of Service on this Web site. You are responsible for regularly
    > > reviewing the Terms of Service. Continued use of the Service after any

    such
    > > changes shall constitute your consent to such changes."
    > >
    > > This one would normally be fine, except they did the indentations wrong,

    so
    > > it looks like it only applies to point 12, which concerns Wireless Web

    Mail.
    > > Oops.
    > >
    > > Now, this isn't a Get out of Jail Free pass for everyone. Its quite

    clearly
    > > a mistake by a low-level paper pusher. But someone needs to tell SPCS

    to
    > > proof-read their T&C's.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > "Chris Russell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]
    > > > http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/in...rmsPrivacy.jsp
    > > >
    > > > Go to item 9 about half way down the page- T & C of Services-read them
    > > > and then decide if you want to sign on for another year and get N&W

    8pm
    > > > start.
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > Chris
    > > >
    > > > Please respond on Usenet or Phonescoop.com
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > [email protected] wrote in article
    > > > <[email protected]>:
    > > > > I got an offer in the mail offering me 8pm N/W minutes if I sign
    > > > > another 1 year agreement and change my terms and conditions of
    > > > > service. Nowhere on the Sprint site could I find my current terms

    and
    > > > > conditions and I am uneasy to change without reading 'the fine

    print'.
    > > > > For example, I am not currently paying the 'cost recovery charges'
    > > > > (whatever they are) and am thinking that if I change my Ts & Cs of

    my
    > > > > plan I will have to pay this fee. Does anyone out there know what

    I"m
    > > > > asking??? Any input would be appreciated.
    > > >
    > > > [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular

    groups]
    > >
    > >

    >
    > [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]






  8. #8
    letsgoflyers81
    Guest

    Re: Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???


    They already screwed themselves with a clause in the AA that was applied
    to WLNP, so this doesn't surprise me.

    --
    Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
    Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap




  9. #9
    Nomen Nescio
    Guest

    Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???

    >He is clearly not an attorney. He is not listed in Martindale-Hubbell,
    >which lists just about every attorney in the US. Two years ago, he worked a
    >Radio Shack. So, at best, he's a law student. See:


    Hey, Sherlock ****ing Holmes. Nomen is the name of a remailer. Thousands of people use the
    remailer, and the name. You think maybe that's why you didn't find the name in MH? I would
    have thought that you would have uncovered the fact that this was a public remailer in all of
    your research. Frankly, i'm shocked that you didn't.

    >So, I'd say his understanding of consumer and contract law is limited, at
    >best. Quite clearly, his "personal experience" is not something I'd bet the
    >bank on.


    I'll tell you what I wouldn't bank on. Your research skills.

    >That being said, in his post (quoted below), he throws his opinions
    >regarding "Federal Consumer Law" around as fact without any citations.


    Are you positive? I think if you read back over the last few months, you will find several
    citations and specific court rulings.

    >I'm not an expert on consumer law


    I think that you could have left that unsaid.

    >so I'll just leave it at I disagree with many of his assertions.


    This sounds reasonable.

    >I invite him to cite the statute and court cases.


    I invite you to do more thorough search, because you will find them.

    >Furthermore, certain phrases he used are marks of a non-attorney. There is
    >no such thing as a "Federal Consumer Law."


    ROFLMAO! No such thing as Federal Consumer Law??? Oh my. I better get on the phone to the
    Federal Trade Commission. And fast. If this is true, those guys have been throwing their
    weight around without authority for decades.

    >There are several statutes that, in totality, make up federal consumer law, but no single Law.


    What? So if some said "According to Landlord-Tenant Law you have to pay your rent", they would
    be incorrect since Landlord Tenant Law is actually made up of literally hundreds of statues?
    They would have to say "According to the totality of Landlord-Tenant law you have to pay your
    rent?". People rarely use your sementics, but if that is the way you need things to be worded,
    so be it. According to various statues in various federal consumer law codes, and in sections
    of most state codes, and according to several district court rulings in the last decade ... many
    aspects of the Sprint PCS T&C are wholly unenforcable. I hope this helps.

    >Also, "consumer law judge"??? There's no such thing.


    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    They're all ghosts. Wait until I tell them.

    You are right, no judge has every presided over a case in which a consumer asserts his/her
    rights, or a class of people have asserted their rights, in disputes with corporations. There
    are no judges which are specifically assigned to consumer/contract cases. None. They don't
    exist. They are holograms. Cyborgs maybe. Who knows. But damn, they sure look real.

    Oh, and hamsters with tutu's and little ballet slippers are re-enacting the Nutcracker Suite on
    my desk as I speak.

    >Considering that all these complaints are for small amounts, they'd end up before a small

    claims >court judge who may or may not have a strong understanding of consumer law.

    Not always. Multiple "small claims" often quickly evolve into class action suits, and those are
    *not* settled in small claims court. And in the case of actual Terms of Service disputes, such
    as Mendoza vs. AOL, they will end up in a district court since the contract itself is being
    challenged and a specific monetery damage is not being sought. And no company wants to have the
    validity of it's TOS challenged in District Court unless they are very confident of a favorable
    ruling. A negative ruling can open the gates for more claims. Sprint's recent decision to let
    people out of their contracts for WLNP charges based on the opinion of a single judge in a
    single district in California illustrates that they certainly did not want this heard before
    other courts.

    Small claims court is the least of a corporation's worries, and it's not the only remedy that
    consumers have.

    >Basically, I haven't found any worthwhile posts by Nomen.


    Well, you can't please everyone.

    I haven't found any worthwhile "research" in your posts, but then again, you don't owe me any.
    I didn't pay you. You just throw in your 2 cents, and everyone can take from it what they want.
    That's the way Usenet works. Everybody contributes their experiences, but in the end, only you
    can decide what value you derive from it. When I start getting paid for you to find my posts
    "wortwhile", I might start putting more effort into them.

    >If you can provide a link to any, I'd be interested in seeing them.


    Hey, why bother?

    I talk alot about Consumer Law and Consumer Law judges and since neither of those exist, it's
    doubtful that you will find any of my posts worthwhile.

    Or, you could search Martindale-Hubbell for a Nomen Nomesco again. That was just plain
    hilarious!




  10. #10
    Nomen Nescio
    Guest

    Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???

    >If you're referring to other posts, please post a link since I couldn't find
    >any others. I'd be interested in seeing it.


    LOL! So you learned about remailers? That's great!!!

    But, there are still no judges that specialize in Consumer Law and judges aren't assigned to such
    cases based on their specialized knowledge of that area? O .... K.

    Well, at least you learned something about remailers. That's a start.

    Oh, and I never claimed to be an attorney. Did I?

    Aaaannnnd, and most people use multiple remailers. You have to. They go up and down so often. It
    would be very hard to "research" my posts as they come in from different routes. Sometimes you
    just have to sit back and lurk, and follow a newsgroup for awhile before jumping in feet first,
    with dick in hand while pissing on people.

    It's possible, just possible, that you may have missed something. Kind of like searching
    Martindale-Hubbell for "Nomen Nomesco" while declaring that he worked at Radio Shack two years ago
    (i'm sorry, I still have tears of laughter in my eyes over that one).

    Sometimes it's better to sit on your thoughts awhile, on the off chance that you may be wrong.

    Or not. This is Usenet, has anyone in the history of the network ever resisted the urge to hit
    "reply" before fully educating themselves on a subject? I dare say not. That's what makes it so
    great.

    Flame on.




  11. #11
    Chris Russell
    Guest

    Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???

    I know that when they change them a notice on my bill tells me to go
    online and read the new T & C's. That could be all the notice they must
    give for legal reasons. Most bill inserts do not get read-having this
    online always makes it accessable.

    --
    Chris

    Please respond on Usenet or Phonescoop.com


    "John" <[email protected]> wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    > Wow. I just took a look at the T&C's, and it's pretty sloppy. Case in
    > point. In every T&C's I've read, it always says something to the effect of
    > continued use of service means you accept the lastest version of the T&C's.
    > All they have to do is make them readily accessable as an insert with your
    > bill or on a web page and inaction by the consumer equals acceptance. So,
    > that means the OP is already stuck with the latest T&C's.
    >
    > However, SPCS's T&C's have two contradictory clauses regarding changes to
    > the T&C. On point 11. Change in Internet Site or in User Agreement, it
    > says "Sprint PCS may modify this User Agreement at any time by posting the
    > revised agreement on the Internet site. Any revised User Agreement is
    > effective upon the user accessing this Internet site." Congratulations, so
    > if I never go to their web site, I'm not bound by the new ones. No one else
    > would do this.
    >
    > Then, towards the end of point 12, they have the more standard policies.
    > "Modifications to terms of service, member policies. Sprint PCS reserves the
    > right to change the Terms of Service or policies regarding the use of the
    > Service at any time and to notify you by posting an updated version of the
    > Terms of Service on this Web site. You are responsible for regularly
    > reviewing the Terms of Service. Continued use of the Service after any such
    > changes shall constitute your consent to such changes."
    >
    > This one would normally be fine, except they did the indentations wrong, so
    > it looks like it only applies to point 12, which concerns Wireless Web Mail.
    > Oops.
    >
    > Now, this isn't a Get out of Jail Free pass for everyone. Its quite clearly
    > a mistake by a low-level paper pusher. But someone needs to tell SPCS to
    > proof-read their T&C's.
    >
    >
    >
    > "Chris Russell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/in...rmsPrivacy.jsp
    > >
    > > Go to item 9 about half way down the page- T & C of Services-read them
    > > and then decide if you want to sign on for another year and get N&W 8pm
    > > start.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Chris
    > >
    > > Please respond on Usenet or Phonescoop.com
    > >
    > >
    > > [email protected] wrote in article
    > > <[email protected]>:
    > > > I got an offer in the mail offering me 8pm N/W minutes if I sign
    > > > another 1 year agreement and change my terms and conditions of
    > > > service. Nowhere on the Sprint site could I find my current terms and
    > > > conditions and I am uneasy to change without reading 'the fine print'.
    > > > For example, I am not currently paying the 'cost recovery charges'
    > > > (whatever they are) and am thinking that if I change my Ts & Cs of my
    > > > plan I will have to pay this fee. Does anyone out there know what I"m
    > > > asking??? Any input would be appreciated.

    > >
    > > [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]

    >
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]



  12. #12
    p lane
    Guest

    Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???

    What ever happened to the rule, that unless you have received something
    like a certified letter, you haven't been notified, legally. This seems
    to leave quite a bit of leeway to what a company can do. Also, what
    abou those "going paperless" It would appear that if I make a deal with
    xyz cell co to provide such and such service(minutes, vision, etc) for
    so much $, and I continue to pay, the the xyz company would need to
    continue to honor our agreement.

    [email protected]am (Chris Russell) wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    > I know that when they change them a notice on my bill tells me to go
    > online and read the new T & C's. That could be all the notice they must
    > give for legal reasons. Most bill inserts do not get read-having this
    > online always makes it accessable.
    >
    > --
    > Chris
    >
    > Please respond on Usenet or Phonescoop.com
    >
    >
    > "John" <[email protected]> wrote in article
    > <[email protected]>:
    > > Wow. I just took a look at the T&C's, and it's pretty sloppy. Case in
    > > point. In every T&C's I've read, it always says something to the effect of
    > > continued use of service means you accept the lastest version of the T&C's.
    > > All they have to do is make them readily accessable as an insert with your
    > > bill or on a web page and inaction by the consumer equals acceptance. So,
    > > that means the OP is already stuck with the latest T&C's.
    > >
    > > However, SPCS's T&C's have two contradictory clauses regarding changes to
    > > the T&C. On point 11. Change in Internet Site or in User Agreement, it
    > > says "Sprint PCS may modify this User Agreement at any time by posting the
    > > revised agreement on the Internet site. Any revised User Agreement is
    > > effective upon the user accessing this Internet site." Congratulations, so
    > > if I never go to their web site, I'm not bound by the new ones. No one else
    > > would do this.
    > >
    > > Then, towards the end of point 12, they have the more standard policies.
    > > "Modifications to terms of service, member policies. Sprint PCS reserves the
    > > right to change the Terms of Service or policies regarding the use of the
    > > Service at any time and to notify you by posting an updated version of the
    > > Terms of Service on this Web site. You are responsible for regularly
    > > reviewing the Terms of Service. Continued use of the Service after any such
    > > changes shall constitute your consent to such changes."
    > >
    > > This one would normally be fine, except they did the indentations wrong, so
    > > it looks like it only applies to point 12, which concerns Wireless Web Mail.
    > > Oops.
    > >
    > > Now, this isn't a Get out of Jail Free pass for everyone. Its quite clearly
    > > a mistake by a low-level paper pusher. But someone needs to tell SPCS to
    > > proof-read their T&C's.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > "Chris Russell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]
    > > > http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/in...rmsPrivacy.jsp
    > > >
    > > > Go to item 9 about half way down the page- T & C of Services-read them
    > > > and then decide if you want to sign on for another year and get N&W 8pm
    > > > start.
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > Chris
    > > >
    > > > Please respond on Usenet or Phonescoop.com
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > [email protected] wrote in article
    > > > <[email protected]>:
    > > > > I got an offer in the mail offering me 8pm N/W minutes if I sign
    > > > > another 1 year agreement and change my terms and conditions of
    > > > > service. Nowhere on the Sprint site could I find my current terms and
    > > > > conditions and I am uneasy to change without reading 'the fine print'.
    > > > > For example, I am not currently paying the 'cost recovery charges'
    > > > > (whatever they are) and am thinking that if I change my Ts & Cs of my
    > > > > plan I will have to pay this fee. Does anyone out there know what I"m
    > > > > asking??? Any input would be appreciated.
    > > >
    > > > [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]

    > >
    > >

    >
    > [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]


    [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]



  13. #13
    Nomen Nescio
    Guest

    Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???

    >I know that when they change them a notice on my bill tells me to go
    >online and read the new T & C's. That could be all the notice they must
    >give for legal reasons.


    I depends on the judge and the jurisdiction (obviously), but in reality they need more than this
    for a change to be legal.

    Usually a contract can only be changed with the affirmative consent of both parties. A contract
    cannot be changed simply by an action not happening.

    For instance, if you sent a letter to Sprint's billing address saying "I am hereby notifying you
    that I intend to change our agreement as follows: A) I am allowed to change and modify our
    agreement at any time B) As of the beginning of the next billing cycle, my calling plan rate
    will be $1. If you do not notify me within 30 days to the contrary, then you agree to and are
    bound by these terms" ... do you really think they would be required to accept $1/month as fulll
    payment? Do you think a judge would rule in your favor?

    There are all kinds of nuances in the law regarding contracts. A standard corporate T&C is
    hardly the last word on a matter. As a matter of fact, just about every company that has been
    sued, and lost, "allowed" themselves to do whatever it was they were found liable for in their
    "Terms and Conditions", "Terms of Service" or whatever they wished to call them. Sure, the T&C
    is a big official looking document, but if it violates any consumer protection statues, or is
    found by a judge to be unfair and deceptive (the fine print cannot taketh away what the big
    print giveth), then that T&C may as well be written on toilet paper.

    The online brokerages tried this in the late 90's. They lured people in with "fast, reliable
    executions", but in order to open an account you had to sign a "contract" which stated that they
    made no garantees to system availability, that the servers may be down, etc, etc ... standard
    "we are not responible for anything" stuff.

    Well, when the servers started going down, and the customers started complaining, those
    companies were slapped with million of dollars in fines. They argued tirelessly that their fine
    print gave them the right to be down, but the SEC would hear none of it. And so they paid.

    So, take those T&C's with a healthy grain of salt. Especially "changes" which you have not
    signed. You're not as helpless as you think.




  14. #14
    Nomen Nescio
    Guest

    Re: "Ts & Cs" of my plan???

    >What ever happened to the rule, that unless you have received something
    >like a certified letter, you haven't been notified, legally. This seems
    >to leave quite a bit of leeway to what a company can do.


    Yes, that is curious, isn't it?

    Actually, those rules are not as antiquated as you think. True "contracts" can rarely, if ever,
    be modified without an (often notarized) signature.

    The thing with T&C's and things of the like is that they are not true contracts. They are wish-
    lists drawn up by company lawyers and bean counters. Courts rarely look at them as bona-fide
    "contracts". They are almost always simply considered advertising fine print. "Contract"
    really is the wrong word to use for these corporate things, although it is short, sweet, and
    easily understood. Obviously they aren't 100% legally binding "contracts", or yes, you would
    have to sign them, and notarize them. Even for a small seemingly insignificant change, you
    would have to re-sign it. "Contracts" are not ever-changing documents that can be thrown up on
    a website and deemed changed once someone makes an HTTP request for it.

    It's not a contract. It's fine print. Or terms and conditions. Or terms of service. Or
    disclaimers. Or whatever they feel like calling them on any particular day. The word contract
    has just become a term they like to use for these things because it just sounds more official
    and legal.

    Now, do these fine print diclaimers have no legality? Not necessarily. If the fine print is
    reasonable, not deceptive, and not harmful to the consumer, then the you pretty much have to
    abide by it. If your fine print says nights begin at 9pm, and you make a call at 8:55pm .. no
    judge is going to rule in your favor. If it tells you that each call is rounded up to the
    nearest minute ... then you aren't going to be able to reclaim you lost seconds in any court
    that I know if. But if the fine print says that you have to pay a $250 fee if you don't rename
    your first child "Sprint" within 30 days of service activiation .... well, what do you think?
    What if they threw that up on the website three months into your signinig up for service. Think
    any judge on the planet would order you to pay $250?

    Now, a real, signed, notarized contract WOULD require you to pay that $250, and it could
    actually be enforced. But a consumer T&C is not given anywhere near the weight of a true
    contract.

    The T&C is not irrelevant, but neither is it a binding contract with the force of law.

    The basic guideline is that if it's in the T&C and it's reasonable and doesn't violate any
    consumer protection statutes, then you have to do it. If it's not reasonable, or if it violates
    any consumer protection statutes in your state, then you can ignore it (although you may have to
    fight the company, but 99% of the time they will not pursue the issue, because they know all of
    this stuff I am telling you - they just bank on the fact that you don't know).

    To be honest, I don't think this "We've posted it to the web and therefore you have to abide by
    it" stuff would fly if anyone challenged it in court. It makes even less common sense than the
    WLNP scam, and the first judge that got a whiff of that issued a preliminary ruling against
    Sprint.

    Just use your service like it was sold to you. If you sign something different, then by all
    means read it first. But, I wouldn't worry about checking the T&C on the web everyday.
    Actually, I never look at it. During many years of service, I have not accessed it even once.
    I don't look at the spam that comes in my bill either. I know it's not relevant. And they know
    that I know that it's not relevant. I have a hardcopy of what I signed in the Sprint store, and
    that is all that is relevant to me. If they try to enforce something that you didn't
    affirmatively agree to, 9/10 times you can reject it with minimal effort. You can't blame them
    for trying.

    Just use your cognitive reason. Oh, and you don't have a "contract" with Sprint. You just have
    a loose consumer agreement with a them. It's not such a dramatic document, and like always,
    everything's negotiable.




  • Similar Threads